Washington State Apparently Taxes Clubs For People Saying On Yelp That They Danced

from the tax-tax-revolution dept

Dancing, what could be more controversial? Whether it's arresting NYC subway travelers for doing the charleston, or body slamming anyone dancing silently at a memorial to freedom, there appears to be something our government dislikes about musically-induced gyrations. With that in mind, it's with a total lack of surprise that I report that the state of Washington is attempting to make up the tax revenue they forgave Microsoft by finding any clubs in Seattle that offer patrons an "opportunity to dance" and taxing the testicles off of them. It all began, apparently, when state lawmakers revised their software royalty tax because of Microsoft.

Well, it wouldn't do for the state to simply have less tax revenue, so to make that amount up they decided to shake down Seattle clubs with a relatively ancient tax on "opportunities to dance" and demanding back taxes from tons of clubs. Just to throw out some numbers, we're talking about tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars owed per club. Moreover, this tax was actually never intended to be applied to night clubs, ballrooms, or bars. It was originally meant for clubs that partook in some ancient ritual called "jazzercise". Now it's being selectively reinterpreted to tax these clubs, even if their patrons don't dance at all.

It works like this: If the state believes that you give your patrons the opportunity to dance, then you pay the tax even when people don’t dance. That’s according to Mike Gowrylow, with the Department of Revenue. Gowrylow: “You could have somebody go into a nightclub, or a bar, or tavern, and they pay cover charges. Unless you followed every person around, you wouldn’t know if they actually danced or not, so the only simple way we could have of defining this is if you give them the opportunity to dance, then the tax applies.”

This has led to a sadly hysterical practice by club owners that involves strategically placing club furniture throughout their floors as a sort of obstacle course to prevent dancing. No, seriously, that is actually happening.

That said, while government could win championships in evil, they're not real big on doing actual work, so you'd imagine it would be quite difficult for Department of Revenue employees to go to different clubs and bars to see if the obstacle courses are obstacle-y enough to warrant no taxation. As it turns out, they don't even bother. Instead, they just troll the internet to see if anyone mentions any dancing at these places. Seriously.

Gowrylow says auditors search the Internet to find out whether people dance at specific clubs. One clubowner reports an auditor told him: “You have the opportunity to dance, and we verified it by 8 or 10 different references on Yelp.”

Think it can't get any stupider? Wrong. One club offers this.

“My auditor… came in with an obituary of a girl who committed suicide,” says another club owner. “When I argued that we aren’t primarily a dance club—we have ‘No Dancing’ signs up everywhere—she flashed this obit that said the girl liked to dance at [our club]. The auditor said, ‘I know this is ridiculous, but I have to do this.’”

Yay, bureaucracy. To pay these thousands-of-dollars fines, many of the clubs in Seattle are asking for donations, noting that, if something in the assessments doesn't change, their businesses may not survive. I know a decent-sized software company that should probably be donating right about now.

Have enough power and wealth and the rules no longer apply.

I am often confused by the claims these huge companies are important to our state, so everyone else has to pay more to support them.
Software, Content, etc. if your big enough you shouldn't be burdened like the little people.

What did we do back in the dark ages when everything was simpler, when everyone paid their own way?

When your chasing tax dollars based on an obit, while giving a large corporation a pass on dodging taxes it really is time to wonder what the hell is wrong with the system and actually fix it rather than look for ways to make it easier for the large corporation to benefit at the expense of everyone else.

i thought this kind of ridiculousness only happened elsewhere. since when does anyone allow a massive company with billions in assets get away with paying nothing onlt to then get the payments they should have made/be making from those that dont have 2 cents to scratch their asses with?? let these other businesses close down and see what the state then does to recoup the greater amount of tax it loses.

How could any human government give a donation of several billion dollars to a gigantic corporation that already rakes in billions in profits off the backs of the human workers and resources they underpaid for? Well, just be happy for that barely living wage job you have, you know if we don't let all the wealth concentrate at the top of the food chain by constant tax breaks for the rich, the wealthy will leave and you'll lost your job and die of starvation.
Never mind that it's set up and specifically designed to work that way, just be happy and pay your taxes.

Re:

Each state is a bit different. Several, at least, offer their liquor licenses in different flavors, for example: a tavern with just a juke box gets one kind, and a nightclub with a stage and a dance floor gets another (cabaret), and a strip club would get yet another (never worked with one of these so I don't know the names), etc. This is a form of tax on dancing as the 'cabaret' licenses tend to be more expensive.

Yet again, problem is at the BIG end.

Now, the interesting part is the characteristic Techdirt diversion: though Timmy explains "when state lawmakers revised their software royalty tax because Microsoft." [sic], he omits not only some word in that sentence, but further omits targeting blame at Microsoft, instead rails about the secondary effects.

Re: Yet again, problem is at the BIG end.

So, you're saying that Tim should ignore the corrupt state legislature who pass laws at the behest of corporations and instead attack just one of the corporations who they bow down to? Sadly, I think you are this stupid. I can forgive your ignorance of popular forms of meme being utilised in a humorous opinion piece, but maybe you should stop the idiotic attempts to derail threads into irrelevant areas. It's your inability to stop posting your obsessive attacks that make any occasional point you have disappear - at least try to keep your stupidity to the threads where they're relevant, you'll get further.

Recession needs to support small business

In an economic recession - you need to SUPPORT your small businesses, not drive them to bankruptcy! The only province in North America not crippled by the recession is Alberta, and it has a government program that turns those who are unemployed into self-employed entrepreneurs (I know, because I took it)

If all these clubs go bankrupt, not only will you lower the quality of life for those who would otherwise be patrons - but you are also killing businesses and jobs that will make the recession WORSE, not better.

Re:

The tax exists several other places. Taxes and royalties have taken a turn to the worse and this kind of tax/royalty is not even close to the most absurd way for a government to waste money on enforcing a law with no chance of actually turning a profit.
Make it profitable to get micro-payments from the internet tax-wise and you will see a far better industry at minimal costs.

The answer is obvious....

Re: Have enough power and wealth and the rules no longer apply.

"When your chasing tax dollars based on an obit, while giving a large corporation a pass on dodging taxes it really is time to wonder what the hell is wrong with the system and actually fix it rather than look for ways to make it easier for the large corporation to benefit at the expense of everyone else."

because Microsoft?

Re:

"i thought this kind of ridiculousness only happened elsewhere. since when does anyone allow a massive company with billions in assets get away with paying nothing onlt to then get the payments they should have made/be making from those that dont have 2 cents to scratch their asses with??"

Which company are you talking about, boy?
One of Mitt Romney's shells?

Re:

Re: Re: Have enough power and wealth and the rules no longer apply.

To make up a shortfall in tax revenue caused by not punishing MS for shifting cash out to avoid taxes and then handing them tax law to keep them from having to pay that tax they are now pursuing small businesses where dancing might happen on a unique reading of a law that hadn't enforced... how are they unrelated again?

The weirdness of bureaucracy always gets me. There are four important complications; taxing thus limiting social activities like dancing and also incursions on the right to assemble. Also the health of citizens would suffer if they could not dance/exercise at normal social gathering places. Then also the philosophical implications of a tax on fun? (and these are aside the normal special interst political-motivation taxing issues.)

Dance is firmly entrenched in our societies culture. Its a normal human social group activity that enhances participants feelings of individual specialness while fitting in with grace and elegance within that group. One can easily say it enhances life and facilitates social group cohesiveness. A valuable social development tool dancing is.

In such light why would any sane bureaucracy tax that? There is no social/societal/cultural/public benefit to it whatsoever. (using the slash notation condenses 4 sentences into one) Taxing at the expense of society is a cultural crime as it robs both the individual and social group of valuable needed interactions.

A tax on a specific activities performed at a social event is an easy way to limit/control/monitor such activities? Why was dancing singled out as bad? Just by levying a tax on something makes it a bad thing to be avoided especially in hard economic times. Its normal human behavior 101.

Another point is freedom of assembly. The right to gather and behave in any way we feel like and not be interrupted by taxing bodies, music police, performance laws, port-a-potty count or whatever. Worse would be if any of these are contrived reasons to prevent citizens from assembling to discuss whatever important topic and interact (dance, sing, act-out, etc) in the way they choose or pick to be valuable for the social occasion it is.

Here we have a society thats beginning to prohibit any assembly of people at all. When people get together whether at home or at a bar/banquette-hall/disco-bar/classical-dance-floor/foot-stomping-western-bar/etc they will do what they want and that should be 100% totally fine WITHOUT PENALTY!

Freedom of assembly is a constitutional issue that has been neglected in favor of 'gang' laws that prohibit gatherings of any kind or use of language of choice. (outlawing hand signals sometimes called signs) Which is silly cuz even chess/math/bio-chem/etc clubs/fraternities sometimes have a secret handshake or recognition sign. Its a kind of class warfare unfairly waged.

Really. Its a tax on shaking your body. How flipped out it that? It was mentioned thats its legislative inheritance was based on a tax of Jazzersize... Why would any city, state or whatever governing body make it more expensive to get healthy. Call me cynical but its more likely the local/state health club special interest group most likely felt threatened by the newer Jazzersize clubs slipping onto their imaginary turf.

Dancing is a healty normal human function and taxing it is insane. Is it any wonder the weight of the aveage American has been increasing? Nope. If even normal human activity is taxed people and business will just either not do it or make it impossible.

Fines of “thousands of dollars” are not small even to large clubs and frequently they just close down. Decreasing tax revenue while increasing fines is economically stupid. How can the bureaucracy hold the club owners liable for activities that are natural and clients just do it spontaneously for fun and enjoyment.

Along that line of thinking; Wouldn't the “dance tax” be an enjoyment tax. That would be the opposite of a vice tax? (cigarettes, booze) On so many levels this kind of government behavior is unhealthy for a happy social society. Did the state legislature actually think this over before voting? Just how strong is the local special interest groups (MS?) What way can they defend against the accusation that this is a tax on society and culture itself?

Wasn't there supposed to be some phrasing like “shall make no laws pertaining to” something like that? Dance is an integral part of some religions (Native American Indians is good example) so laws like this can have even more cultural damage.

Dance As Sex

For historical reasons, dancing is a conventional proxy measure for sex. For at least four hundred and fifty years that I know about, authority figures have been freaking out about dance in some form or another. In the 1560's or so, it was an Italian dance call La Volta. Judging by surviving pictures, you pick the girl up by her waist, and lift her about a foot in the air, like a ballet "pas de deux," only not so high. Authority grumbled that it was productive of "murder and miscarriages."

(Courtly dance was the ancestral form of ballet, only its technical standards were not so high as was achieved in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.)

Obviously, in these terms, the way clubs are regulated makes sense. The authorities reckon about how many notches away from a brothel a club is, and act accordingly.

Opportunity to strike back

Ah, my warped mind has come up a great idea: now in Washington state we can get back at all the evil corporations by posting youtube videos of a mob dancing at say... Walmart, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, just to name a few big corporations. Since they've all managed to get tax breaks, we can negate the tax breaks simply by dancing. Anyone care to join me?

Re: Re:

That would just get you arrested for trespassing.

No, a better way to drive home how insane something like this is would be to show up at any political rally, fundraiser, group meeting etc, have a few people start dancing, another take a picture, and then send that in. If businesses start refusing to host their meetings for fear that they'll get fined, that'll hit their funding, and that they'll care about.

Re: Taxation without representation... Again...

While I don't believe a tax on dancing is likely to incite insurrection

Probably not, but it's interesting to note how many times in history that full-blown revolutions were triggered by relatively insignificant things like this. This sort of thing can become the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.

WA Taxes

I live in Washington. Not sure I want to continue. If it weren't for family I would have moved already.

The yahoos in Olympia and on the King County Council keep telling us we need to pay our share in terms of the second highest sales tax in the nation. We're tied with the highest fuel tax. They want to toll one road (which crosses an island -- ask those folks how THEY like that!) to pay for another road -- this has never been done anywhere in the US. Our previous governor forced indian reservations to collect taxes -- not that the state got those taxes, just that they collect taxes.

1.51bn would more than halve the state budget shortfall for fy13. While its true that this wont fix Washington's budget ills, it would help. Even just the $100M might help keep the wealthiest county in the state's buses running.

Olympia has bizare priorities.

Even Gates Sr. wrote a ballot initiative to create in income tax for the highest earners in the state. It was defeated largely because ballot initiatives can be rewritten after 2 years.

The new marijuana legalization is already turning into a quagmire with lawmakers unhappy with the $1000 license fee for sellers now wanting to make the fees locale centric so, for example, a downtown Bellevue location could pay $250,000 for their license. This is combined with a 75% tax on sales. The whole purpose was to make the black market irrelvant through legal availability. By taxing something so high that it is cheaper to use a well establish black market there would be little to no taxes collected.

So long as the lobbyist is represented and not the taxpayer this state will continue to cowtow to folks like Ballmer, Page, Bezos, and more, rather than looking out for the ones who actually voted.

MS

The Internet.

That said, while government could win championships in evil, they're not real big on doing actual work, so you'd imagine it would be quite difficult for Department of Revenue employees to go to different clubs and bars to see if the obstacle courses are obstacle-y enough to warrant no taxation. As it turns out, they don't even bother. Instead, they just troll the internet to see if anyone mentions any dancing at these places. Seriously.

if i dance somewhere, it does not necessarily mean i was given the opportunity by the club to do so. i could have taken the opportunity from them. i could go dance in the lobby of the office of these auditors and that doesn't mean they gave me the opportunity. the simple observation of someone dancing is not enough.

Corrupt state government

Washington State is nothing more than a corrupt criminal conspiracy. Governor Gary Locke bribed voters to get them to vote a certain way. Governor Christine Gregoire when she was AG went to great efforts to cover-up the child rape at the OK Boy's Ranch. Rob McKenna as AG refused to uphold and enforce the state constitution. The Washington State Supreme Court was strongly admonished by the US Supreme Court for it's ridiculous ruling in the In Re the Custody of Smith (Troxil) case.

At every level of state, county and municipal government here in Washington State you will find the most despicable degenerates holding public office.

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Yes and no I'd say. As the SOPA protests showed, threaten a politician's chances to get re-elected and that'll get their attention just as quick, so you don't always have to affect their funding directly to get them to start paying attention to the whole 'serving the public' bit that they like to ignore so much.

Re: Taxation without representation... Again...

"Taxes when taken in moderation, are necessary to make a government financially self sustaining."

No, all taxes are theft (or extorion under the treat of violence). If you want to finance services, charge for the services. If people are not willing to pay for something, then the government has no right to supply the service.

‘Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed.’ - Robert Heinlein
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man, standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." --Winston Churchill

Re: Taxation without representation... Again...

"Taxes when taken in moderation, are necessary to make a government financially self sustaining."

No, all taxes are theft (or extortion under the treat of violence). If you want to finance services, charge for the services. If people are not willing to pay for something, then the government has no right to supply the service.

‘Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed.’ - Robert Heinlein
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man, standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." --Winston Churchill

Re: Taxation without representation... Again...

"Taxes when taken in moderation, are necessary to make a government financially self sustaining."

No, all taxes are theft (or extortion under the treat of violence). If you want to finance services, charge for the services. If people are not willing to pay for something, then the government has no right to supply the service.

‘Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed.’ - Robert Heinlein
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man, standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." --Winston Churchill

Tax

Re: Re: Taxation without representation... Again...

"No, all taxes are theft (or extortion under the treat of violence). If you want to finance services, charge for the services. If people are not willing to pay for something, then the government has no right to supply the service."

I agree, and in an ideal world, this is the way it would be done.

Unfortunately, the world we live in is far from ideal, governments have been collecting taxes since the dawn of civilization, and are unlikely to stop anytime soon.

However, as long as we ensure that tax amounts and conditions are reasonable, and that there is some tangible service provided to the taxpayer in return, it is usually a good compromise.

Granted, of course there are better ways, but implementing them is a long and difficult road.

Btw, check that your post took before retrying. Its happened to me a few times too, so no worries, just be careful...

Re: Re: Re: Have enough power and wealth and the rules no longer apply.

> To make up a shortfall in tax revenue
> caused by not punishing MS for shifting
> cash out to avoid taxes

I agree that Microsoft should be paying more (or at least the dance halls shouldn't have to make up for the shortfall), but why should the state punish *anyone* for tax avoidance?

Tax *evasion* is illegal, but tax avoidance is perfectly legitimate. Everyone does it. When you take a deduction on your taxes as allowed by law, that's tax avoidance. When you choose to live in Texas rather than California because Texas has no state income tax, that's tax avoidance.

Indeed, the Supreme Court has not only legitimized tax avoidance but given it its stamp of approval:

"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands." --Justice Learned Hand

Given all that, I kinda take issue with your suggestion that the state should be punishing people for tax avoidance.

Re: Taxation without representation... Again...

It is the government's prerogative to raise taxes.

No. It's the government's job to do what we tell them to do (within reason, constitutionally constrained). There's lots of ways to fund that which don't include taxation (user fees, fines, donations, ...).

While I don't believe a tax on dancing is likely to incite insurrection ...

Were I a small businessman trying to keep a small tavern afloat, and they hit me with something as corrupt as this, I'd be looking to emigrate to somewhere more sensible.

Re: Re: Re: Taxation without representation... Again...

I agree, and in an ideal world, this is the way it would be done.

This may be a bit unreasonable on my part, but I am an idealist. Putting up with this atrocious conduct is just painful, and we should NOT be expected to put up with it. They should not be able to get away with this.

They assume too much, and I'll boycott the whole shootin' match before I'll go their way.

Re: Recession needs to support small business

The only province in North America not crippled by the recession is Alberta, and it has a government program that turns those who are unemployed into self-employed entrepreneurs (I know, because I took it).

Re: Re:

Balls are certainly good, however, being a formal dance where attendees wear evening attire, which is specified on the invitation as black tie or white tie (the most formal), and as social dance forms a large part of the evening it will certainly be taxed.

PS Sorry about the earlier triple post, Damn screen just sits there, pretending that it has not sent anything.

Re: Have enough power and wealth and the rules no longer apply.

Yes in the dark ages things were much more simple.
There was basically a caste system where a middle class did not exist.
From my point of view as an American that realizes that America is no longer a representative republic, and is now an oligarchy; I contend that we are headed back into the dark ages again with monarchs, serfs and peasants.